Ever wondered how nice it would be if everyone would die at once, in order to avoid any grief? Although it is unlikely to happen, there are more realistic alternatives: the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (VHEMT, «vehement») suggests to cease breeding, in order to extinct gradually. “What is in it for me?” – you may wonder; not much, actually: their goal is to save the environment, and it would only help future generations to not exist – rather selfless thing overall.
To put it straight, VHEMT is all about environment, not really about reducing human suffering, while the latter may just come as a side effect. A broader philosophical position is antinatalism, which just “assigns a negative value to birth”; the reasons behind that may include environmental concern, as well as moral responsibility, based on premises, such as the following:
- The presence of pain is bad.
- The presence of pleasure is good.
- The absence of pain is good, even if that good is not enjoyed by anyone.
- The absence of pleasure is not bad unless there is somebody for whom this absence is a deprivation.
Such views are not new, and were mentioned by Aristotle a while ago – back when he was alive:
For he lives with the least worry who knows not his misfortune; but for humans, the best for them is not to be born at all, not to partake of nature’s excellence; not to be is best, for both sexes. This should our choice, if choice we have; and the next to this is, when we are born, to die as soon as we can.
Fortunately, procreation may be both less desirable and easier to avoid for an asocial person.